Today I am!Ask me again tomorrow, but I think I'm 75% sure that's what I'll be ordering!
I may preorder both, and cancel one after try-ons, but I'm not sure
Today I am!Ask me again tomorrow, but I think I'm 75% sure that's what I'll be ordering!
And 42mm. Disclaimer. 42mm looks larger in picture than in real life![]()
Based on only seeing the picture and this is my own personal opinion, that looks way too big on you. I'd say go for the 38mm.
I have similar sized wrists to you and was debating between the two sizes for quite a while for the larger real estate etc but eventually decided on the 38mm as it would just look better on me. But of course, it's your choice. Let us know what you choose![]()
My wrist is same as your size and after trying each size I'm leaning towards 38mm. The extra screen size would be nice but I feel the 38mm looks better.
so my wrist is 216 mm so do i take 216-42= 174 is that my band size (174mm)
I think Apple's wrist measurement include the watch height. Unfortunately, I think that only leaves you with the classic buckle which would (just) fit.
I don't think it does. There is no sense in doing that. The band measurements are for just the band only and don't include the height of the watch in my opinion.
Well we will find out Friday. But your logic makes no sense.
Hey, these bands will fit wrists between 130-180mm. Oh, but that's after you've made deductions. They don't actually fit wrists between 130-180mm even though we clearly put 'fits wrists 130-180mm'. We're just messing with you.
My logic makes perfect sense. Why on earth would they include the height of the watch in length measurement of the bands.
Well we will find out Friday. But your logic makes no sense.
Hey, these bands will fit wrists between 130-180mm. Oh, but that's after you've made deductions. They don't actually fit wrists between 130-180mm even though we clearly put 'fits wrists 130-180mm'. We're just messing with you.
My logic makes perfect sense. Why on earth would they include the height of the watch in length measurement of the bands.
Because using that logic, the smallest size possible would be 168mm, which is pretty large. They would be ignoring a huge part of the population, which they aren't.
Sorry I miss read the post. I thought it said otherwise. Yes the length of the bands must include the height of the watch as it forms part of what goes around the wrist. Apologies.
Oops, just seen your post. Apologies if I came across as rude at all, I didn't mean too![]()
My logic makes perfect sense. Why on earth would they include the height of the watch in length measurement of the bands.
I can't be the only one thinking the 42mm would look ridiculous on some (even a male's) wrists?